Tweet
It goes without saying...the game has regressed...devolved.
But of course you are absolutely correct here regarding the anticipatory skills of tennis players today and the state of the game in general. The level of tennis has absolutely regressed. Today's players are one trick ponies...and it is frightfully boring. The truth of the matter is so horrible that the masses are afraid to admit it. Sort of reminds me of something else on a larger scale.
Today's modern version of tennis is a one dimensional game. You can see it in the wear and tear of the grass courts of what were once the hallowed grounds of tennis. It is all the same today...the game is played as lobndropshot suggests. It is all about the forehand. The engineering of the game is the only thing that makes this possible. Think about it.
So if today's modern game is one dimensional how can you possibly compare it to the three dimensional game of yesteryear...plus the fourth dimension of tactics. The cerebral dimension. The last days of tennis...the classic game. John McEnroe vs. Björn Borg being the swan song. The classic game ended on a high note. A true tennis student is also a historian of the game. Today if you are a historian you are labeled as a nostalgist or otherwise relegated to some other name calling designating you as obsolete.
Just look at the draw sheet from any of the Grand Slam championships of 1972 and you will see a wide range of playing styles and no lack of talent. The three dimensional game was played not only from the baseline to the net and all points in between where you had to consider not only the latitude and the longitude but also the altitude. When advancing to the net the third dimension of using the height above the court was a big factor. The court extends upwards...a forgotten concept. Great lobbers. The overhead smash. Now correct me if I am wrong but it looks to me as if one of the big stars of today has a difficult time executing a basic smash.
But basically people are generally in denial when it comes to the state of things...and about the things to come. Back when the larger racquets were introduced I was screaming bloody murder..."my" game had been hijacked. I was dead certain about it. The equipment and the coaching. So you are absolutely correct in my estimation with regard to the coaching as well. There is no dancing around this.
You only have to look at the pathetic state of American tennis as somehow we slipped into the politically correct version of coaching tennis. To deviate or not be in lock step with the infomercial brand of coaching is to be a pariah of sorts...which is what some do to paint or gloss over the reality of things. Certification is required to teach the game...may we see your papers please? Thought police...they are even trolling here on the forum.
Today's players are anticipating and covering the court from the backcourt. This is not nearly as sophisticated as playing the whole court and it is almost delusional to believe otherwise. But it is a lot like trying to convince todays teenagers that there was life before the cell phone. The masses do not want to hear it. They are mesmerized by the grunting and the squealing that accompanies every pass on the tennis ball. They are so impressed with the sheer physical effort that the mental aspect of real tactics is obliterated. Come on...certainly it is easy to recognize that there is athleticism involved. But what of the subtlety of a deft approach and the one-two volley combination of court opener and kill or putaway? What about beautiful flowing service motions with the accompanying tactics? Anybody out there looking at me cross-eyed yet? I can almost hear the heads shaking.
The obsession with the forehand is an indication that the game has been reduced to a rather simpleton approach to what was once a very sophisticated and elegant sport. Reduced to brute speed and power the resulting tactics are mindless in comparison to the intricate and delicate combination of options from the classic era.
But in defense of the the modern day aficionado's there isn't much of an option. This is the game we are stuck with in a sense. But the real problem is that the coaching skills with regard to service motions, play in the middle of the court and the net play have been severely neglected for years. The result is that anyone that just might think otherwise is ostracized and made to look like a fool by the idea that consensus is something of a deal breaker. It isn't...and it never has been.
Originally posted by worldsbesttenniscoach
View Post
Today's modern version of tennis is a one dimensional game. You can see it in the wear and tear of the grass courts of what were once the hallowed grounds of tennis. It is all the same today...the game is played as lobndropshot suggests. It is all about the forehand. The engineering of the game is the only thing that makes this possible. Think about it.
So if today's modern game is one dimensional how can you possibly compare it to the three dimensional game of yesteryear...plus the fourth dimension of tactics. The cerebral dimension. The last days of tennis...the classic game. John McEnroe vs. Björn Borg being the swan song. The classic game ended on a high note. A true tennis student is also a historian of the game. Today if you are a historian you are labeled as a nostalgist or otherwise relegated to some other name calling designating you as obsolete.
Just look at the draw sheet from any of the Grand Slam championships of 1972 and you will see a wide range of playing styles and no lack of talent. The three dimensional game was played not only from the baseline to the net and all points in between where you had to consider not only the latitude and the longitude but also the altitude. When advancing to the net the third dimension of using the height above the court was a big factor. The court extends upwards...a forgotten concept. Great lobbers. The overhead smash. Now correct me if I am wrong but it looks to me as if one of the big stars of today has a difficult time executing a basic smash.
But basically people are generally in denial when it comes to the state of things...and about the things to come. Back when the larger racquets were introduced I was screaming bloody murder..."my" game had been hijacked. I was dead certain about it. The equipment and the coaching. So you are absolutely correct in my estimation with regard to the coaching as well. There is no dancing around this.
You only have to look at the pathetic state of American tennis as somehow we slipped into the politically correct version of coaching tennis. To deviate or not be in lock step with the infomercial brand of coaching is to be a pariah of sorts...which is what some do to paint or gloss over the reality of things. Certification is required to teach the game...may we see your papers please? Thought police...they are even trolling here on the forum.
Today's players are anticipating and covering the court from the backcourt. This is not nearly as sophisticated as playing the whole court and it is almost delusional to believe otherwise. But it is a lot like trying to convince todays teenagers that there was life before the cell phone. The masses do not want to hear it. They are mesmerized by the grunting and the squealing that accompanies every pass on the tennis ball. They are so impressed with the sheer physical effort that the mental aspect of real tactics is obliterated. Come on...certainly it is easy to recognize that there is athleticism involved. But what of the subtlety of a deft approach and the one-two volley combination of court opener and kill or putaway? What about beautiful flowing service motions with the accompanying tactics? Anybody out there looking at me cross-eyed yet? I can almost hear the heads shaking.
The obsession with the forehand is an indication that the game has been reduced to a rather simpleton approach to what was once a very sophisticated and elegant sport. Reduced to brute speed and power the resulting tactics are mindless in comparison to the intricate and delicate combination of options from the classic era.
But in defense of the the modern day aficionado's there isn't much of an option. This is the game we are stuck with in a sense. But the real problem is that the coaching skills with regard to service motions, play in the middle of the court and the net play have been severely neglected for years. The result is that anyone that just might think otherwise is ostracized and made to look like a fool by the idea that consensus is something of a deal breaker. It isn't...and it never has been.
) as a plea for more control. For example, instead of trying to hit at 90 MPH all the time with a big back swing - which means the ball will mostly go from baseline to baseline - why not counter punch with a shorter back swing, and use the increase in control to put the ball where the opponent does not like it. This is a very good point. Even in the relatively low level tennis that I play, a hard hit shot (50 MPH? 
Comment